Based on the theory of exceptional circumstances, on 15 May 2024 the government announced a temporary ban on the social network TikTok in New Caledonia. This decision was taken against a backdrop of violent riots in the archipelago.
The French authorities accused TikTok of being used by demonstrators to communicate and coordinate their violent actions. The ban on TikTok was accompanied by the declaration of a state of emergency and the deployment of the army in New Caledonia. The aim of these measures was to restore public order.
The background
The situation arose following the adoption of a constitutional bill reforming the electorate, a reform opposed by the Kanaks. This reform extends the right to vote to people who have been resident on the island for 10 years.
The pro-independence movement fears a recolonisation of the archipelago. The 1998 Nouméa Accord provided for voting to be reserved exclusively for residents of the island prior to the conclusion of the Accord.
The democratic role of social networks in times of crisis
Since their inception, social networks have given Internet users the opportunity to rally around common causes in the form of written messages, images and videos. This phenomenon has had a considerable impact on public opinion and behaviour between those in power and those being governed. According to P. Flichy, social networks make it possible ‘to bring together multiple citizen actions through activities of vigilance and denunciation’.
It is through social networks that protest movements have been organised, leading to the collapse of political and legal orders and, conversely, the creation of new political parties. The most telling example is the ‘Jasmine Revolution’. The Arab revolution led to the fall of several regimes. This revolution owes its success to the mobilisation made possible by social networks. The social networking model thus escapes all censorship and blocking by the powers that be.
Citizens are now informed and able to challenge policies or news stories by mobilising via social networks.
The government’s powerlessness in the face of the power of social networks
The government’s decision to block social networking sites on may 15 th is an admission of weakness on the part of the government, demonstrating its powerlessness in the face of these digital platforms. The government has no choice but to ban access to the TikTok social network in order to limit rebellions.
In times of crisis, the association of powerful recommendation algorithms with hateful content disseminated online encourages a disinhibition of violence in the real world.
France has already fallen victim to this phenomenon during the riots in the summer of 2023 following the death of one person, caused by a police shooting. The video of the policeman killing Nahel was widely circulated on the networks, leading to uncontrollable riots. On this subject, a Senate report dated 9 April 2024 recommends ‘blocking certain social network functions in the event of major tension’.
Why TikTok?
Why ban this social network and not another? According to Agence France Presse, government sources have indicated that countries such as China and Azerbaijan are seeking to inflame tensions using these social platforms. Foreign interference in social networks today represents a real danger to the stability of Western democracies. This theory is not new. The United States wanted to get rid of this social network once and for all. On 24 April 2024, Joe Biden signed a bill to ban its availability in the United States.
A measure that would appear to be liberticidal
On 17 May 2024, ‘La quadrature du Net’ and ‘La ligue des droits de l’Homme’ appealed to the Conseil d’État for a preliminary ruling on the ban. The militant associations consider this measure to be liberticidal and anti-democratic.
Blocking a forum for coordinating collective action to challenge a policy appears to infringe freedom of expression and assembly.
Before the Conseil d’État, Aurélie Bretonneau, deputy to the government’s secretary general, defended the government’s position, stating that ‘the authorities have noted that the networks as a whole played a role in the propagation of these disturbances: meetings of rioters, dissemination of violent videos likely to provoke general public excitement, competition in violence and dissemination of false information to fuel an impression of widespread violence and provoke reactions of revenge’.
The administrative judge dismissed the applicants’ appeal
On 23 May 2024, the administrative judge rejected the associations’ application for interim relief. In the administrative judge’s view, the applicants had not demonstrated the urgency required to exercise this right.
The Conseil d’État reminded the associations that in France, the exercise of public freedoms is subject to respect for public order. This means that individual freedoms are not absolute and may be temporarily restricted by the authorities in the event of public order disturbances. These restrictions are intended to protect public safety and restore calm. The principle of proportionality governs restrictions on civil liberties. They must also be temporary and end as soon as calm is restored.
The blocking of TikTok has therefore been maintained until 28 May 2024.
Antoine Candau
M2 Cyberjustice – Promotion 2023/2024
SOURCES :
Flichy, « La démocratie 2.0 », Études, n° 412, 2010, p. 617, spéc. p. 621.
Cherif Ferjani, « Inspiration et perspectives de la Révolution Tunisienne », Confluences Méditerranée,
Rapport d’information n° 521 (2023-2024), 9 avril 2024
https://www.actu-juridique.fr/id/AJU439703
